Unintended Consequences and Frederic Bastiat

 by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – October 16, 2021

 

The idea of unseen or unintended consequences might appear rather straightforward, but to get people, especially policymakers, to understand or consider what is unseen or unintended often can be a monumental task.

Frederic Bastiat was a leading economic and political thinker in the first half of the 19^thcentury. He opened his famous essay “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen” this way:

 

In the economic sphere an action, a habit, an institution, or a law engenders not just one effect but a series of effects. Of these effects only the first is immediate; it is revealed simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other merely occur successively; they are not seen; we are lucky if we foresee them.

The entire difference between a bad and a good economist is apparent here. A bad relies on the visible effect, while the good one takes account both of the effect one can see and of those one must foresee.

 

In day-to-day economics, Bastiat’s point is untidy in terms of nailing down numbers and estimates, but that makes it no less real nor does it mean that it lacks importance. Indeed, quite the contrary. Economists can wind up spending a great deal of time explaining the full effects of various actions, especially those effects not intended or of a first order, and especially on the public policy front. 

 

In fact, as economist David Henderson noted in The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics: Among other issues, Bastiat “emphasized the unintended consequences of government policy (he called them the ‘unseen’ consequences). Friedrich Hayek credits Bastiat with this important insight: if we judge economic policy solely by its immediate effects, we will miss all of its unintended and longer-run effects and will undermine economic freedom, which delivers benefits that are not part of anyone’s conscious design. Much of Hayek’s work, and some of Milton Friedman’s, was an exploration and elaboration of this insight.”

 

Bastiat applied the concept of unseen effects or unintended consequences to a variety of topics, such as trade barriers, taxes, and government spending. And economists continue to do so today, or at least, they should. The idea of unintended consequences indeed is central to being a good economist, and is something that economists need to teach others, especially politicians.

_________

 

Ray Keating is a columnist, novelist, economist, podcaster and entrepreneur.  Keating has three new books out. Vatican Shadows: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel is the 13ththriller/mystery in the Pastor Stephen Grant series. Get the paperback or Kindle edition at Amazon, or signed books at www.raykeatingonline.com. Past Lives: A Pastor Stephen Grant Short Story is the 14th book in the series. Get the paperback or Kindle edition at Amazon, or signed book at www.raykeatingonline.com. And order the 15^th book in the series What’s Lost? A Pastor Stephen Grant Short Story.

 

The views expressed here are his own – after all, no one else should be held responsible for this stuff, right?

 

You also can order his book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York  from Amazon or signed books  at RayKeatingOnline.com. His other recent nonfiction book is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know. 

 

One of the best ways to enjoy Ray Keating’s Pastor Stephen Grant thrillers and mysteries is to join the Pastor Stephen Grant Fellowship! For the BEST VALUE, consider the Book of the Month Club.  Check it all out at https://www.patreon.com/pastorstephengrantfellowship

 

Also, check out Ray’s podcasts – the Daily Dose of Disney, Free Enterprise in Three Minutes, and the PRESS CLUB C Podcast.

 

Check out Ray Keating’s Disney news and entertainment site at www.DisneyBizJournal.com.

The COVID-19 Crisis, Part II: A Bastiat Moment

Part II of a Projected Three-Part Series

(Read Part I Here)
by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – May 21, 2020

The COVID-19 crisis turns out to be a moment to consider a 19^th-century French economist.

Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) was a leading economic and political thinker. One of Bastiat’s most important insights has popped up among those who have been arguing strongly against any kind of government restrictions during the COVID-19 crisis. What is this point? Bastiat opened his famous essay “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen” this way:

In the economic sphere an action, a habit, an institution, or a law engenders not just one effect but a series of effects. Of these effects only the first is immediate; it is revealed simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other merely occur successively; they are not seen; we are lucky if we foresee them.

The entire difference between a bad and a good economist is apparent here. A bad relies on the visible effect, while the good one takes account both of the effect one can seeand of those one must foresee.

Bastiat actually comes in handy for all of us when looking at the economic and health costs of this crisis.

First, we are seeing a wide array of economic costs due to the governmental restrictions and shutdowns implemented in response to the virus, including declining economic output and investment, lost jobs, diminished trade, and falling income and consumption. There’s no missing this grim fallout.

But there is, indeed, more. Assorted economists are right to point out that there are unseen costs. Politicians and many in the media refer to trillions of dollars being spent by the federal government to aid individuals, families and businesses – in response to government having shutdown large parts of the economy – as “stimulus.” They see dollars and loans helping certain people and firms. Unseen, though, is the fact that those resources must come from somewhere, that is, being diverted from other endeavors, and resulting in real and substantial costs. Also, unseen are the future costs of this spending, in terms of burdens placed on taxpayers not too far down the road. Those unseen costs promise to be significant and lasting.

But Bastiat’s unseen effects go beyond this as well. For example, at the time of this writing (early morning on May 21), according to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, global coronavirus cases registered 5.02 million, including 1.55 million in the United States, and worldwide deaths stood at 328,471, and at 93,439 in the U.S.

As tragic as these deaths are, the actual numbers likely are worse. Unseen are a rise in unexpected deaths not assigned to the coronavirus but likely tied to the pandemic by either being undiagnosed coronavirus cases, or dying due to other causes untreated because of the COVID-19 outbreak. (See, for example, a Tampa Bay Times analysis for Florida, and a Wall Street Journal article.)

And then there are the unseen lives saved. Critics of stay-at-home orders, social distancing and even wearing masks like to look at the latest number of deaths and rather callously proclaim that this hasn’t been as bad as was predicted, and therefore, the actions taken have meant little to nothing. In reality, the death toll not only keeps rising – soon to pass 100,000 in the U.S. – but it should be obvious that staying at home, social distancing and other efforts have avoided unseen deaths, that is, it has saved many lives. After all, that was and is the point of such actions. Duh.

The New York Times has reported on work done by researchers at Columbia University that estimates that 36,000 fewer people would have died if social distancing efforts had gone into effect a week earlier in March, and if lockdowns had gone into effect on March 1, some 83 percent of the nation’s deaths could have been avoided. Now, there always are major problems with such modeling, but the directional aspect is undeniable. 

Yes, I’m comfortable in assuming that the number of unseen deaths in the U.S. would have been markedly higher (double or more than double?) without social distancing undertakings. In turn, a strikingly higher number of deaths, of course, would have come with a wide array of additional, unseen economic costs.

Indeed, this is a Bastiat moment, and yes, it is untidy in terms of nailing down exact numbers and estimates, and arguments promise to labor on as to the costs and benefits of what’s been done, and what would have happened under other scenarios. And these kinds of discussions and analyses will need to be done so that we can learn, and be better able to address future pandemics.

But throughout, let’s have compassion and regret for those who have fallen ill and died; let’s deal soberly with the real and brutal economic costs; let’s show some humility in terms of what we know and what we don’t; and let’s assume that, while we disagree, we’re all trying to do what’s best.

__________

Ray Keating is a columnist, economist, podcaster and entrepreneur.  You can order his new book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York  from Amazon or signed books at RayKeatingOnline.com. His other recent nonfiction book is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know. Keating also is a novelist. His latest novels are  The Traitor: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel, which is the 12^th book in the series, and the second edition of Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel with a new Author Introduction. The views expressed here are his own – after all, no one else should be held responsible for this stuff, right?

Also, tune in to Ray Keating’s podcasts – the PRESS CLUB C Podcastand the Free Enterprise in Three Minutes Podcast